Newspaper Page Text
Telephone AL. 3-6931
United Electric Company, Inc.
71 N. Market Street
Asheville, N. C.
Night Phone AL. 2-3324
Carolina Tire & Retreading Com pang
Corner College & Vance Dial AL. 3-7335
Asheville, North Carolina
“Pickup and Delivery Stations Everywhere'’
B. F. Goodrich Store
Retail Division of
The B. F. Goodrich Company
109 Patton Avenue
ASHEVILLE, N. C
ursey & Company
J I J
07 Haywood Street
ASHEVILLE, N. C.
Asheville's Oldest Jewelers
Moseley’s Shoe Service
Phone AL. 2-0758
2 LOCATIONS
Westgate Shopping Center
53 College St. Asheville, N. C,
Shop at
Sears and Save
"Satisfaction Guaranteed
or Your Money Back"
40 Coxe Avenue
ASHEVILLE, N. C.
i on. Apparently there has never
been in past history—certainly not
in Jewish history anything com
parable to the “colonies of elderly
persons” which have mushroomed
in the warmer parts of the United
States.
From the sociological viewpoint,
this American family is a response
to industrialization, urbanization
and, in more recent years, suburb
anization. In personal terms, the
factors of the desire for success
and for the symbols of success,
also have tremendous influence on
this pattern of family living.
The economic opportunities cre
ated by industrialization require
two kinds of mobility—geograph
ical and vertical. Geographically,
a man must be ready to move to
whatever part of the United States
is required for a better position.
Vertically he must also be free to
move up the ladder of success.
Freedom from kinship ties is nec
essary to both kinds of mobility.
The man-wife-child family pat
tern interferes least with the de
mands of the industrial society.
The two-generation family has the
basic effect of isolating its mem
bers from relatives. This isolation
means less contact between the
adults of the modern family and
their relatives. This situation, in
turn, fits the demands made by
the struggle for success on the
time of the young couple, particul
arly the husband. There isn’t much
time left for his family, let alone
his parents, brothers and sisters
and other relatives.
This family is nicely adapted to
the demands of twentieth-century
American industrialism, but there
is a price. Apparently this fam
ily is less satisfactory as a ve
hicle both for industrial satisfac
tions and the perpetuation and
transmission of values in which
the family—especially the Jewish
family—has been of critical im
portance throughout history.
Another price is the frequent
absence of integration between the
husband and wife of this modern
American family. Dr. Aronson
blames this on “the husband’s over
involvement with success and the
wife’s over-involvement with the
community . . . and joint under
involvement with the home.”
Even children, historically a
strong integrating force in mar
riage relationships, are sometimes
resented “because they curb the
individualistic activities of both
husband and wife.”
Dr. Aronson’s thesis is that the
piesent-day Jewish family is very
much like the non-Jewish family.
In fact, he believes that the Jew
ish home in America “is more
American than most other homes
in the United States. “The forces
which have produced the modern
American family “are especially
operative in the Jewish family.”
The lone exception seems to be
the concept of romantic love has
not yet become strong enough
among American Jews to weaken
endogamous restrictions — that is,
American Jews are still marrying
Jews.
In most other respects, however,
the American Jewish family may
be more mobile, more isolated,
more individualistic, more unsup
ported and subject to greater pies-
sures than comparable non-Jewish
urban and suburban families.
It is a Jewish family strikingly
different from the Jewish families
of the past by which Jewish conti
nuity was assured, particularly in
terms of mutual Jewish aid. “The
Jewish family today is very mo
bile,” says Dr. Aronson, “and
mobility and strong family solid
arity are mutually exclusive.”
WHERE
HO
)
One of our readers writes in to
suggest that since movie attend
ance has fallen off, it might be
wise to do a little research w'ork
and find out why it has
slumped. He felt that the answer
might shed some light on how to
rebuild Temple attendance. And
so, checking over my research de
partment, I came upon the fol
lowing answers to the question.
“Why I Do Not Attend the Mov
ies.”
No one speaks to me; the mov
ies are so unfriendly. When I go,
they always ask for money. One
ticket should admit my entire
family because there is just one
source of income for all of us.
When I get home from the office
I must rest because I’m just too
tired. I saw a poor picture once
0 V
Ell
IX?
and it rubbed me the wrong way
and I decided never to go again.
There are so many hypocrites who
attend the movies that I do not
feel that it is the place for me.
Movies may be a good thing but
I just don’t like the manager’s
attitude toward some of the social
questions of the day. I can see
better movies outdoors from the
movies because I went so much
when I was a child. I don’t go
because somehow I feel that the
ones in the other seats don’t care
whether I am there or not, they
probably do not pay any atten
tion to me because my income is
not very large. I don’t go to the
movies because the manager has
never called on me. I don’t go to
the movies because we have our
own movies at home.
22
The Southern Israelite